Hatred is not the only fruit of bigotry. Apathy and contempt are the more common ones.
Bigotry, pure and simple, is the assumption that you are better than someone else. Not because you’ve earned that position; it’s because you just are. You were born better, raised better, went to a better school, have more money, or have age and wisdom over others. (Or the advantages of youth.) You live in the greatest country in the world, or practice the best religion in the world, or follow the best ideology. Or you have the best parents in the world, or the noblest ancestors, or you have the purest genes.
In some cases it’s because you believe you did earn it: You have your wealth because you worked for it, or you have your social connections because you made the time to develop them—and others don’t because they’re deficient. So you made yourself better.
Of course, it’s not too big a leap to the assumption that you made yourself better because you’re innately better. That’s the subtle nature of Objectivist bigotry.
In any event, bigotry is the antithesis of Christianity. The scriptures teach that we are not the best, but the worst, because we were born slaves to sin, and have embraced that destiny. But God flipped that around by graciously providing a way out—if we humbly recognize that we are the problem, and he is the solution. We are wrong; Jesus is right.
Well, often we Christians assume that because God is the solution, we’re not the problem anymore. Which is why 80 percent of our nation thinks themselves Christian, but those who act it are few and far between. (And I’ll admit right now that I suck at acting it.) A whole lot of us are, contrary to what our religion stands for, bigoted.
Now of course we deny that bigotry the instant we’re accused of it. “I’m not bigoted. I don’t hate anyone.” Bigotry is not necessarily hatred. That’s a common misconception. For example, people believe because they don’t hate homosexuals, they’re not bigoted. Even though they clearly think, and demonstrate with their every behavior, that they’re better than homosexuals. Their sins are supposedly lesser. (As if God recognizes any such distinction.)
Really popular forms of bigotry right now, among the people I know, are the anti-Muslim, the anti-Mormon, and the anti-poor sort. Again: They don’t hate these people, but they don’t want ’em living in their neighborhood, and would be happy to deport the lot of them if they could get away with it. If something unjust happens to any of these people, they might think that’s so sad, but they honestly won’t care, or get riled up about it at all. After all, they’re not “our sort of people”—they’re not identified with. Despite how Jesus wants us to identify with everyone, as he does.
Take the current issue of Lowes yanking their ads from the TV show All-American Muslim, simply because some anti-Muslims protested the show. Lowes doesn’t want to get involved in the controversy. Clearly they don’t think the right course of action is to blow off the bigots. Had this been a controversy about, say, Mexicans, on a show called All-American Mexican, Lowes’s position would never have been, “We want to stay out of it.” They’d have rightly responded to the protest group, “You’re anti-Mexican bigots; this is America and we’re proud of our ethnic diversity.”
That’s what should have happened in this case. It didn’t. Somehow the statement “You’re anti-Muslim bigots; this is America and we’re proud of our religious diversity” didn’t happen. Because we’re not proud of our religious diversity. We’re a Christian nation. Or so my friends believe. Muslims, even if American citizens, are unwanted aliens who might breed the wrong kind of radicals. Lowes’s statement was therefore, “We want to stay out of it.”
It’s kinda like when the White Citizens Councils, from the 1880s to the 1960s, contacted the local branches of various department stores and told them to fire all their blacks. Or Jews, Catholics, Irish, Chinese, Mexicans, or whomever they were bigoted against this year. The stores could’ve stood up to them. Rarely did they. Not for economic reasons; white people aren’t that patient. They burned those stores to the ground, and killed anyone who got in their way—and killed any blacks who were foolish enough to be nearby. Throughout American history, the terrorists have rarely been Arabs or Muslims; they’ve nearly always been white people. Supposedly “Christian” white people.
In this day and age, whites would be prosecuted for such behavior, so they’ve largely stopped. Now, instead of terrorism, they resort to creating “family associations” and threatening boycotts, or supporting bigoted candidates like Herman Cain, who would purge all the Muslims from the executive branch. But take away their terrorism and the antibigots come out of the woodwork; in Lowes’s case, had they stood up to the anti-Muslims, they’d have had the business of grateful Muslims and grateful antibigots. As they should. But we won’t see that happen unless Lowes repents.
The anti-Mormon bigotry is manifesting itself in an interesting way. Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker who irresponsibly shut down the government in 1995 and ’96, who’s been convicted of House ethics violations and has (as far as we know) cheated on every wife but his current one, has a two-digit lead over Mitt Romney in the current polls. Why? Aren’t conservatives concerned about the morals of their presidents? Wasn’t that most of the argument in favor of Bill Clinton’s impeachment? Gingrich’s conservative ideology isn’t that much purer than Romney’s. What gives?
Well, Gingrich is a Catholic and Romney is a Mormon. As I said before, Christians are leery of a heretic becoming president. They would rather have a orthodox hypocrite than a consistent heretic. That’s why, thus far, they’ll embrace anyone in the Republican race so long that it’s not Romney. Such is the sentiment of my conservative friends. They can overlook Gingrich’s sloppy ethics, and argue that he’s cleaned up since joining the Catholic Church. I would argue that he joined the church in order to appease Wife #3, not because he’s become born again; I simply don’t see the fruit of the Spirit in the guy. Of course I could be wrong, because I don’t know him personally and can’t see for myself whether he’s fruitful or not. All I know is from what he says to the press, and it doesn’t make the case for him. But bigotry will let you embrace any wacky argument, so long that it provides some rational substance to your bigotry. Any paper-thin argument that lets you pick Gingrich over Romney will do.
Lastly the anti-poor sort. Poverty sucks, and I don’t recommend it as a lifestyle. But if you want to see anti-poor bigotry firsthand, start telling everyone that you’re unemployed, and watch their respect for you melt away like a snowman in the sun. You know, half the reason people don’t share their problems isn’t because they fear people’s pity. It’s because a lot of people don’t offer pity. They only offer contempt: “You’re poor? What’s wrong with you? Stop being poor! Just… stop!”
One of my favorite verses in the bible is slowly becoming something Mary said:
- “He scattered those who were overconfident in their thinking.
- He pulled dynasties from their thrones and lifted up the lowly.
- He filled the hungry with good things.
- He sent the wealthy away empty.” [Lk 1.51-53
KWL ]
I don’t, as some progressives do, believe that God intends to overturn the rich simply because they’re rich. That too is bigotry. I believe he’s gonna overturn them because they lack compassion; because he gave them money and power for the sake of improving their world and growing the kingdom. Instead they felt they earned and deserved it, spent it on themselves, and mocked their world for not improving by itself. That’s the fruit of thinking you’re better than others.